Monday, July 31, 2006

We Must Keep up with our Terminology

There is a story here about how a local politician used the term "colored people" in the apparent belief that he was using the currently approved term for Americans of predominantly African ancestry. He was made to feel ignorant and ashamed for using that term. He should have asked his critic what NAACP stands for.

But it is just typical Leftist nonsense to think that constantly changing the name of something changes the reality.

A lot of blacks are more brown than black so "colored people" was in fact more accurate (Though I guess I am colored too -- colored pink, in fact -- see here).

And it seems to me that "African-American" should be reserved for Americans born in Africa. I suppose we should be grateful that "black" is currently OK. It is a lot shorter than "Americans of predominantly African ancestry".

Racist or Realist?

Is the statement below racist?

"Racism and discrimination clearly still exist, but it is becoming increasingly apparent that the problem of minority underperformance is much broader and more nuanced than can be explained by the impact of racism alone," he wrote.

"When two-thirds of black births are out-of-wedlock births, it is hard to write a happy or prosperous future for black America. When close to 50 percent of Hispanic students don't graduate from high school, it is hard to see Hispanics following the typical American route to prosperity."

That was former Colorado governor Richard Lamm saying that minority culture was part of the cause of minority failure. He was accused of "bigotry and extremism" for saying so.

EVERYTHING is someone else's fault these days, of course.

A Music Video you are Unlikely to See on Network TV

As readers of this blog will be well aware, the attacks on public references to Christianity (and thus on the First Amendment) are unceasing in the USA these days. Christianity, however, tends to thrive on persecution so I think the attacks might have some large unintended consequences -- like many Leftist policies.

So not everyone is bowing down to the gods of enforced secularism. And there is an excellent country music video here that is part of that rebellion. It is called "In God we Still Trust" and this version has some excellent graphics. Some background on it here

Apparently some Satanist nut sent the NAACP an email warning them of doom about to befall them and that got the Federal wheels grinding.

What it means, however, is that there is now no privacy of email communication. Anything you have ever written may have been stored and may be used against you later. I hope loud protests will be forthcoming but in the meanwhile I am not going to be sending anything much out from my Gmail account.

I think even the Leftists may be disturbed by this one. It should feed their already hefty paranoia.

Black Homosexuals Sink AIDS Concert

Caribbean singers censored

A concert had been arranged for New York's Caribbean blacks that was designed to help raise awareness of AIDS. And Caribbeans like Caribbean music so two popular Caribbean singers were induced to volunteer their services.

But the singers concerned are, like most Caribbeans, hostile to homosexuality. So New York blacks demanded that the singers "apologize" for their views or they would shut the concert down.

The singers undertook not to sing anything controversial but would not apologize. So the New York blacks got the concert cancelled. Why should they care if Caribbean blacks get AIDS? Details here

Self-Censorship in Britain

We read:

"Saucy snaps of Big Brother babe Imogen Thomas were censored in case they offended Iraqis. She was Miss Wales when she posed in her underwear and a helmet in photos to boost the morale of the Army. But only the "safest" snaps were sent out to Welsh soldiers in Iraq to avoid offending Muslim locals.

Saturday, July 29, 2006

A REAL Hate-crime in Seattle

Most of the "hate crimes" in America that the ACLU and others are always foaming about amount to some preacher saying that homosexuals will burn in Hell or the like. But the Seattle shooting of six women in a Jewish Center was a REAL hate-crime. How do we know? Because the shooter was a Muslim who said he did it out of anger at Israel.

"Racist" to Advocate Use of English

A local New Jersey politician has been getting accused of racism because:

"Bogota Mayor Steve Lonegan has been a fixture on the national talk show circuit since he demanded two weeks ago that McDonald's replace a Spanish-language billboard in his town with an English version."

I didn't know that English was the property of any one race. There must be a lot of confused blacks around if so. But anyway, since the U.S. Senate has recently declared that English is the language of the USA, I guess that they are racists too.

Obviously, however, the term "racist" is, as usual, just being used to suppress debate. I myself think McDonalds should be allowed to advertise in any language that they like but the Mayor has a legitimate argument too and it deserves reasonable discussion. And a Congressional subcommittee is holding hearings on the role of English right now, in fact.

Joky Sign Condemned by British Police

The sign says "Our dogs are fed on Jehovah's Witnesses". It is obviously a joke but the British police thought that it was "distressing, offensive and inappropriate" and ordered it to be taken down. Details here

The Canadian culture of being "offended" at the drop of a hat seems to have taken its toll on garters. A business there has up a picture dating from Victorian times in which a lady has her skirt lifted up enough for you to see her garters. Apparently the garters lifted up some parts of a prudish Canadian too so he complained about it. When that did not do anything he took the law into his own hands and painted over the bits that offended him. Details here

The Order of the Garter is one of the most ancient and prestigious orders of chivalry there is in Britain, so there is at least one Canadian who has really lost touch.

It's a sad day when the language of the Old Testament can get you attacked.

Christian Witness Suppressed by Police

Police who obviously don't give a damn about the First Amendment

We read:

"A Philadelphia-based Christian ministry has filed a lawsuit claiming three of its members were harassed by authorities in Chicago for sharing their faith with homosexuals in the city for the "Gay Games," an Olympics-style sports event.

Repent America - which saw 11 of its members arrested two years ago evangelizing at a public homosexual-activist event - says the three in Chicago were handcuffed and arrested for passing out Christian literature to homosexuals and holding up signs with Bible verses near the city's popular Navy Pier, reports Agape Press."

Matthew 28:19,20 makes it clear that proclaiming Christian teachings is part of what Christians are commanded to do by their religion so "freely exercising" their religion DOES include preaching it to unbelievers.

Pigtown

There's a Baltimore neighborhood called "Pigtown" which has recently become rather upscale. It gets its name from its working-class origins and that gets up the snouts of some of the fancier present-day residents -- so they are trying to change the name. There is a big article on the controversy here.

The old-timers seem to have a good chance of retaining the original name so far but what if a few Muslims move in? In the name of Islamic correctness, the old-timers will be vanquished overnight!

Thursday, July 27, 2006

Info for Newcomers

Thoughtful comments greatly enhance this blog so are encouraged. To comment, click on the permalink squiggle to the left of where it says "Comments". Comments must however be civil and relevant to the posts or they may be deleted. The blog and its comments facility is private property so please respect that condition of its use.

Most of the posts here originate from links to stories sent in by readers. To send in links, email John Ray.

A "Right of Access to Information"?

In its fight to keep pro-Cuban propaganda in Florida school libraries, the ACLU is arguing that students have a "right of access to information".

They say that the right is found in the First Amendment. Their copy of the Constitution must be an odd one because I see no such right there but I sure hope they win their case anyway.

If they do, all conservatives should immediately demand of schools that their kids have a right of access to "A Patriot's History of the United States". That should REALLY put the cat among the pigeons. Decades of academic misrepresentation of U.S. history would fall away rapidly.

The Race Card Again

No-one ever treats a black in a critical way because the black is belligerent. They only treat a black in a critical way because the black is black. That seems to be the reasoning in this story, involving fat black entertainer "Mo'Nique".

The story concerns a confrontation between "Mo'Nique" and flight attendants on United Airlines and I am certainly in no position to judge the rights and wrongs of the matter, though given what flight attendants regularly put up with uncomplainingly, I know where my presumptions would lie.

The point I see, however, is that as long as blacks keep blaming all their problems on racism, they will forever be making THEMSELVES second-class citizens. Let them just talk about the behavior concerned -- as whites do.

"Him" Incorrect in the British Police

We read:

"A 19-year-old female candidate for the police service recently learnt a hard lesson in diversity awareness. She had passed her written tests, and in her interview was asked what she would do if she needed advice. She replied: "I would go to my sergeant and ask him for help." She failed the interview for referring to the sergeant as "him", thus revealing her lack of gender awareness".

Wednesday, July 26, 2006

Loony University Teacher

I have not so far said anything here about the current controversy at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. State legislators want the university to fire an instructor, Kevin Barrett, who says that 9/11 was the work of GWB. See here.

I think the legislators are dead wrong. Having that loony sponsored by the university should make it clear to almost all of the students what loonies the university faculty are in general. I can think of nothing better designed to show students what junk they are fed at university. It might even make Republicans out of a lot of them. Much foot-shooting by the UW Leftists there, I think.

It would be nice for UW to sponsor a conservative speaker of some kind as well but their dread of students hearing some truth for a change rules that out, of course.

The Good Old Predictable ACLU

Their latest caper is that they are defending the deranged Fred Phelps. See here. Regardless of any other merits of the case, the fact that Phelps attacks the U.S. military would have ensured ACLU support for him.

For an extensive briefing on Phelps see here. A very weird character indeed. Note that Phelps's political affiliations have always been Democrat and that he is a fan of Fidel Castro. No wonder the ACLU likes him!

Phelps should clearly be allowed to say what he likes but insofar as military funerals are private functions, he has no right to intrude on them -- and legislation designed to clarify what is private and what is not at military funerals is perfectly appropriate.

Tuesday, July 25, 2006

Explanatory Note

This blog has always in theory been a group blog. For a long time, however, Scott was the only one keeping it going and for a shorter time I have been the only one keeping it going.

Scott has however recently located someone else who is willing and able to contribute -- and posts from him have just appeared below. He has not chosen to identify himself as yet but I would nonetheless like to welcome him aboard. I have seven blogs of my own that I update daily so I have never been able to devote to this blog nearly as much attention as I would have liked. Another contributor is therefore very welcome as a helper in covering the many things that I undoubtedly miss.

From the beginning, all posts originating from me have had my name on them. That will continue.

Duty or Beauty?

Since 1898, The United States Military Academy has had the words "Duty, Honor, Country" emblazoned on its coat of arms but that cuts no ice in California, apparently.

On July 6th., I noted the way the word "beauty" had been used to replace "duty" in a plaque on the wall of a California Veterans' Administration facility.

I have now put up the original article that drew the matter to public attention. It is interesting to read what was behind it all. See here

Flag Update

This won't go down well in much of California:

"President Bush on Monday signed a bill that would bar condominium and homeowner associations from restricting how the American flag can be displayed...

Cmdr. Andy Solberg was so "insensitive" as to speak the plain truth. He reported that a group of murderers were black and that blacks were rare in Georgetown. I mentioned the matter on 13th. He was shunted from his job as a result of his truth-telling but he has now been reinstated. But he had to grovel first:

"I was wrong, the remarks were insensitive, and I have learned a lot in the past few weeks," he said Monday".

Monday, July 24, 2006

Must not Quote Blacks

Apparently it's (barely) OK if black conservatives criticize black culture. Even blacks who are not committed conservatives (such as Bill Cosby) can do it. But woe betide a white man who quotes those "black" words -- as Colorado Rep. Jim Welker has been finding out.

He quoted words to the effect that New Orleans blacks were too dependant on welfare. And that was condemned as racist.

But who is the racist there? Why are the words of blacks unable to be quoted? Is what blacks say second-class speech that does not count and which polite people must not quote? Whether or not Welker is a racist, it seems clear that his critics are.

Local Debate about Illegals Continues to Seethe

I have mentioned a couple of cities where local ordinances have been enacted that penalize landlords who rent to illegals. It seems to be a growing movement. The idea is however -- perhaps predictably -- encountering stiff resistance in Oregon. A local councillor who did not use any kind of racial term was -- again predictably -- accused of being "racist" for advocating such a law.

What Springfield City Councilor Dave Ralston said was:

"We cannot continue to absorb the flow of illegal immigrants, many of whom benefit from government services that our citizens provide ... They want to invade and not assimilate ...

"This is MY country and I have a right to stand up for it," Ralston wrote. "Illegal immigrants are breaking OUR laws and getting away with it. Just try to go to one of their countries and do what they are doing here and see what happens. This is `America' and we speak English, love it or leave it."

That's a pretty clear claim that debate on immigration should be restricted only to certain "correct" thoughts: No robust and open debate in Oregon, please!

More on the Bible as Homophobia

Homophobia means FEAR of homosexuals (from the Greek "phobos", meaning fear) so using the word is a form of propaganda. That you can dislike or disapprove of homosexuality without being afraid of it is not admitted. And there is no evidence that the Bible texts express fear of homosexuality.

The Old Testament tells you that you should stone homosexuals to death (Leviticus 20:13) and the New Testament tells you that God will judge homosexuals adversely (Romans chapter 1) but to say that such ideas are the outcome of fear is a mere assertion without proof. I think it would be more accurate to say that normal people feel an instinctive revulsion against homosexuality and the Bible reflects that.

But one thing that is clear is that Christians follow the New Testament and leave penalties to God. They endeavour to warn those who practice sodomy of the doom to come in the afterlife but they do no harm to those who practice sodomy. To the contrary, they try to draw them into the love of God.

So when Britain's "Gay Police Association" published an advertisement linking the Bible with spilt homosexual blood, they were simply lying.

The advertisement was accompanied by the claim:

"In the last 12 months, the GPA has recorded a 74% increase in homophobic incidents, where the sole or primary motivating factor was the religious belief of the perpetrator."

And how many of those "homophobic incidents" involved bloodshed? I am sure we would all know about it if even one did. The advertisement is clearly just an hysterical attempt to suppress free speech about homosexuality -- because you can bet your bottom dollar that the "incidents" involved nothing more than speech

Sunday, July 23, 2006

In the USA, this would be "Racist"

From Britain:

"Black and Caribbean girls will be the targets of the Government's latest drive to bring down the rate of teenage pregnancy, The Times has learnt.

The move has been ordered by Beverley Hughes, the Children's Minister, who is concerned that teenagers from some ethnic minority groups remain much more likely to become pregnant than their peers from different backgrounds, even after taking into account factors such as deprivation and poor educational achievement.

A guy in Maine rolled a frozen pig's head into his local mosque. It was meant to offend and it did and local prosecutors promptly charged him for doing it.

But that was not the end of it. Like homosexuals, Muslims seem to be an especially protected caste so now the State Attorney General has levied a charge against the guy too. But even that is not enough. The Muslims are now clamoring for a Federal charge against him as well. Details here.

I wonder what Muslims have done to deserve such special treatment? Blown up and beheaded a lot of people as far as I can see. Is that really the type we should be extending special protection too?

Saturday, July 22, 2006

The 9th Circuit Strikes Again

It has just declared that some people have fewer free speech rights than others. If you are in a "minority", you can say more or less what you want. But if you are in a "majority", any restrictions on what you say are OK.

I cannot see where they find that in the First Amendment but, Hey! the law is anything the judges say it is, is it not?

The case is Harper v. Poway Unified School District and the aim of the decision was -- Surprise! -- to make it illegal to criticize homosexuality.

Details here. Presumably, SCOTUS will strike the decision down but I wouldn't bet on it.

Note that a direct implication of the decision is that Christians are not allowed to defend Christianity. So there is no doubt that the 9th. Circuit pisses on the First Amendment.

Local Action Against Illegal Immigration Works

I mentioned on 18th. that a Pennsylvania city had passed an "Illegal Immigration Relief Act" which penalized landlords for renting to illegals.

The city of Avon in Florida has passed what appears to be a very similar act and -- hey presto! -- things are happening. Much to the chagrin of the local citrus growers, the illegals mostly seem to have left town. Details here

Friday, July 21, 2006

Canadian Professor Fined for Criticizing Homosexuality

I have just had an email from history Professor David Mullan, of Cape Breton University, advising that the university has fined him two week's pay ($2100 -- but that's only Canadian dollars) for criticizing homosexuality to his bishop. He posted the letters to his bishop on his private website but a homosexual student saw them and accused him of a human rights violation. Prof. Mullan did not back down, however, and emailed the student back saying that homosexuality was against nature. Apparently you must not say that if you work for a Canadian university, however. Once again, no free speech in Canada.

Details of the case here. Prof Mullan's site is here. I previously noted the case here on June 4th.

Truth About Hispanics Must not be Spoken

New Mexico GOP candidate John Dendahl said on a radio talk show:

"I think that the Legislature understands that statistically, too many people who are repeat offenders happen to have Spanish last names."

Thursday, July 20, 2006

The Latest from The House

The Federal House has just voted to take the Pledge of Allegiance outside the jurisdiction of SCOTUS and, as I write this, is also moving to declare the San Diego cross a federal war memorial -- thus protecting it from removal.

How far either measure will get in the Senate no-one knows but the San Diego cross should be a shoo-in.

Article 3 of the Constitution vests in Congress the right to confer judicial powers on the courts so excising the Pledge from the jurisdiction of SCOTUS would seem legally sound but whether it is wise is another matter. SCOTUS knocked some of the worst of FDR's socialist measures on the head so limiting its jurisdiction might be a bad precedent for the future. My guess is that the Senate will reject the measure.

Apparently you can no longer call a woman that -- or so Maryland comptroller William Donald Schaefer found out. He is 84 so probably sees most women as little girls but even that does not excuse him apparently. He called a female reporter that and feminists have been up in arms about it:

"Duchy Trachtenberg, co-president of the Maryland chapter of the National Organization of Women, said her group will send a letter later this week asking Schaefer to resign his post before the election."

I'm guessing that few people would be tempted to call the Maryland NOW women "nice looking".

There are some amusing stories about Schaefer on Wikipedia. He seems to have a habit of mentioning the unmentionable.

The Bible is Hate Speech

And who says so? Muslims, Homosexuals? Atheists? Humanists? No. It was the recent General Convention of the Episcopal Church.

Their reaction to a resolution affirming Jesus Christ as "the only name by which any person may be saved" (a reference to John 14:6) was "This type of language was used in 1920s and 1930s to alienate the type of people who were executed. It was called the Holocaust."

So the claims of Jesus as recorded in the New Testament are akin to the antisemitic rants of Hitler.

If I were a Christian, I think I would see the Episcopalians as the Devil's mockery of Christianity.

An attempted justification for the actions of the convention can be found here. Apparently, they did not want to "offend" anyone. The fact that they offended all Bible-believing Christians doesn't count, of course.

Tuesday, July 18, 2006

The Muslim View of Tolerance

In "The American Muslim" we read an apparently Jewish writer saying:

"Young children in my Jewish community have been wearing kippot that say in Hebrew Ani Oheb Kol Yehudi, I Love All Jews. Such a public pronouncement serves to announce to the world that Orthodox Judaism has become an intolerant and xenophobic and racist faith."

If I said that I love all dogs, would that mean that I hate cats? More probably the reverse, I suspect. But it looks like logic is a bit much to expect from Muslims and their sympathizers.

Crackdown on Illegality "Racist" and "Nazi"

Hazleton City Council in Pennsylvania recently passed an ordinance called the Illegal Immigration Relief Act which imposes $1,000 fines on property owners for each illegal immigrant renting and denies licenses to businesses who employ illegal immigrants. Nowhere is race mentioned. It would have no effect on Hispanics who are legal U.S. residents, so it clearly does NOT discriminate on the basis of race.

But according to the Solons of the Left, it makes Hazleton "the first Nazi city in the country" and this newspaper heads its story: "Hazleton codifies racism". So once again we see Leftists using irrational slurs in an attempt to suppress intelligent discussion and action.

I guess that the mega-correct British Labour Party government must be Nazis too. We read of them:

"Directors of firms employing illegal immigrants could be banned from running companies under reforms drawn up by John Reid"

Update:

And I wonder what the loonies would say of the Australian government's practice of putting all illegal immigrants in "detention centres" (jails)? Australians must all walk around doing the goosestep!

To let up from the sarcasm for a moment, the Australian army does NOT have a parade march ("Goosestep"). Being myself a former Sergeant in the Australian Army, I can assure you of that.

Monday, July 17, 2006

OK to Incite Islamic Violence

We read:

"An Islamic hate book that encourages martyrdom and war against non-Muslims has been approved by Australian regulators...

It contains references to bloodletting in the name of Allah and calls to rail against other faiths. "When you meet those who disbelieve, smite at their necks 'til when you have killed and wounded many of them, then take them as captives," it reads. "You are ordered by Allah to continue carrying out jihad against the disbelievers until they embrace Islam"

I am no fan of Google. I think the political bias of its news service stinks. But it is a private company that charges users nothing for its services so should be entitled to do its reporting any way it likes. If people don't like it, they can go elsewhere -- as I do.

So I was pleased at this judgment which says that the courts have got no jurisdiction to decide how Google does and reports its searches. Excerpt:

"US District Court Judge Jeremy Fogel tossed out claims that Google unfairly discriminated against KinderStart.com and stifled its free speech rights by giving it the lowest ranking in searches, court documents showed today. Fogel ruled Google was entitled to express its subjective opinion in page rankings"

I seem to remember that Kinderstart had been using artificial means to inflate its page ranking and thus make itself appear more popular than it is. Whenever Google discovers that, it seems to be their system to assign a bottom page-ranking to the site concerned as a way of cancelling out the deceptive conduct. Google was, in other words, protecting the accuracy of its searches.

Sunday, July 16, 2006

Must not Explain your Vote

From the Muzzled Kingdom:

"A branch of one of the world's biggest banks has been found guilty of racism after a senior member of staff told a colleague she would be voting for Robert Kilroy-Silk at the last general election because she said he promised to "get rid of the foreigners".

Note that it was not the person spoken to who complained and it was the employer that was found guilty, not the maker of the statement. What has happened to the natural justice principle that people should not be penalized for the deeds of others?

Hate Speech from Homosexuals

In some very "liberal" areas, such as Provincetown Massachusetts, many homosexuals now seem to think that they are a superior breed and that they can insult other people in a way that they would condemn as "homophobia" if it were directed at them.

Given the constant pandering to them by Leftists everywhere, (See earlier posts on this blog, e.g. here), they cannot altogether be blamed for concluding that they are superior -- but their verbal attacks on normal people can surely not be excused. In Provincetown, homosexuals even direct slurs towards black Jamaican immigrants.

So what is the official reaction to it all in Provincetown? The important part is surely this: "police say they do not consider the incidents hate crimes". So that's OK then. Compared with the case of Michael Marcavage, however, the police double standard would appear to be huge, though it is consistent.

Saturday, July 15, 2006

No Free Speech Via Cellphones?

Not in good old law-strangled NYC. Nobody would dispute the right of any school to insist that kids turn off their cellphones during classes. But the boneheaded education bureaucrats of NYC insist that kids cannot have cellphones on school property at all.

Many parents are now rebelling at such stupid rigidity and pointing to cellphones as a safety aid for their children while the children are travelling to and from school. Details here

Islam NOT a "Dangerous Religion"?

How much evidence would we need before we decided that it WAS a dangerous religion? It is of course obvious that not all Muslims are dangerous people but that the religion has a dangerous effect on the minds of many would hardly seem rationally disputable, given the unending stream of horrors perpetrated by Muslims both before and after 9/11.

Yet a black pastor in Florida was forced out of a government job for saying that Islam was a dangerous religion. Details here

More on the Rules for "Nazi" Accusations

I don't suppose this will surprise anyone much but Newsbusters points out that the frantically Leftist Keith Olbermann of MSNBC said of Nazi references: "There's no place for the reference in this culture".

Newsbusters then goes on to list a number of Nazi references from Olbermann himself, all directed at conservatives, of course. Leftist hypocrisy has no limits and no shame.

Friday, July 14, 2006

"The parking fine was $10. But the comment Robert Militzer added to the check could land him in jail for 30 days.

The computer programmer from Allen Park got the ticket May 29. When Militzer wrote the check to Berkley District Court, he scribbled on the memo line, "BULL (expletive) MONEY GRAB."

That got Militzer an in-person court appearance - on a contempt of court charge. He's scheduled to go before a judge Wednesday, accompanied by an American Civil Liberties Union attorney who will argue Militzer's remark is protected by the First Amendment.....

ACLU lawyer Elsa Shartsis said Militzer's "choice of words may not be the best, and it may offend some people, but it's not illegal."

As I mentioned on Education Watch recently, the Miami-Dade School Board in Florida has decided to take off the shelves of their school libraries a book that paints Cuba in an unrealistically rosy light. No mention in the book of Cubans risking their lives at sea to escape their "workers' paradise" and get to the heartless capitalistic America that their propaganda is always telling them about.

Leftists are of course fighting the ban. They have now received support in their "struggle" -- from the State librarians of Cuba:

"The librarians, from a country that bans books and music it considers politically incorrect, compared the School Board to Nazis who censored Alice in Wonderland, according to a report in the Cuban press titled "The True Censors are in Miami."

Thursday, July 13, 2006

Double Standards about Calling People Nazis

The rule is: You must NOT call anybody a Nazi unless you are talking about conservatives. Or so it seems. Democrats are always calling President Bush and other conservatives Nazis and the general idea you get is that such a practice is seen as rather clever. It certainly does not evoke shocked condemnation from all and sundry.

And it does not matter if you don't explicitly use the word "Nazi". You can use a broad hint if you like. Most conservative bloggers will remember when Al Gore referred to them as "digital brownshirts". "Brownshirts" were of course Hitler's Storm Troops (Sturm Abteilung).

So if someone thinks you are Nazi-like and indicates that by using a well known Nazi slogan like Sieg Heil in a mocking way -- as Leftists sometimes do to conservatives -- that should be OK, right?

WRONG! A New York schoolkid did just that. He added a comment to his school yearbook entry that was in fact one of the most well-known Nazi slogans. He wanted to indicate that he thought the school was excessively authoritarian.

And his teachers, being dumber than he is, did not pick it up and let the slogan go through and get printed.

Given the prevalence of the accusations that conservatives are Nazis, I should perhaps note in passing here a a bit of basic history: Just as the Ku Klux Klan were Democrats, so Hitler was a socialist. The word "Nazi" is in fact short for "National socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch in German).

Important Clue for Catching Murderers Must not be Mentioned

A police commander was issuing a description of some wanted murderers:

"I would think that at 2 a.m. on the streets of Georgetown, a group of three people, one of whom is 15-years-old, one of whom is a bald chunky fat guy, are going to stand out. They were black. This is not a racial thing to say that black people are unusual in Georgetown. This is a fact of life."

In Georgetown, the number of white people outnumber the number of black people 23 to 1."

The police commander has been "reassigned" because he divulged the race of the wanted men. Background here

Federal ruling stops video censorship

We read:

"A federal judge in Denver has ruled in favor of Hollywood executives by making it illegal for retail video companies to censor their products. The Los Angeles Times reported U.S. Judge Richard P. Matsch found that such practices violate copyright laws".

Videos and the movies appearing on them are private property. That's why you have to pay for them. So the judge is right. But it remains open for distributors who want to make "family friendly" versions of extreme movies to negotiate with the copyright-owners for a license to do so.

Wednesday, July 12, 2006

Coping With Islam: Censorship in Dutch Academia

We read:

"University professors in the Netherlands are not allowed to voice "unscientific" opinions that are too critical of Islam. One such opinion is the statement of Pieter W. van der Horst that "the Nazis' irrational hatred of the Jews has been adopted in the contemporary Islamic world."

At a meeting today in Amsterdam a large majority of the chancellors of the Dutch universities agreed that "academic freedom at universities should be limited."

It helps you to understand one thing that is wrong with an establishment of religion. It becomes effete and corrupt.

Being an academic, I cannot resist grumbling about the poor grammar in the article from which the above quote was taken. "slayed" is used in the headline instead of the usual "slain": Just another example of the constant Leftist attack on educational standards bearing fruit, I guess.

Tuesday, July 11, 2006

Another Wicked Slave Trade Name under Attack

The English city of Bristol recently underwent a bout of Leftist self-inflation over its links with the slave trade two centuries ago (blogged here on May 13th.) and now the chest puffing has extended to Liverpool. We read:

"Liverpool council is in the midst of a debate over whether Penny Lane and other suburban streets should undergo name changes to remove their links with the slave trade. Named after wealthy slave trader James Penny, it is one of seven streets which may be renamed after people who fought against slavery, rather than 18th century traders who profited from it."

The fact that a famous Beatles song refers to Penny Lane will, however, probably save it. No-one of course was aware of the slave-trade "link" until some busybody dug it up. I am sure that 99% of Liverpudlians would have thought the name referred to a coin.

Louisiana: "Racist" to Describe Murder Suspects Fully

St. Tammany Parish Sheriff Jack Strain wants to catch those guilty of a quadruple murder. He described the suspects as young black men, one with dreadlocks and one with a "chee wee" hairstyle. He also said that people fitting the description were very likely to be interviewed by his deputies. But the ACLU says that's "racist". Details here

Maybe the ACLU thinks that everybody should know that the criminals will be black, unless otherwise stated. I guess they do at that: Media coverups in crime reporting are pretty transparent. But doesn't that make the ACLU guilty of racist assumptions?

Cristal Update

On June 21 I mentioned that certain rap singers who were big customers for an expensive French champagne called "Cristal" had been miffed when the French producer of the brand, Frederic Rouzaud, appeared unenthusiastic about his drink having such rough customers.

According to this report, a ban on Cristal has now spread widely in rap circles.

The amusing part lies in the last sentence, however. Malcolm X Abrams, a leading writer on black culture, was apparently endeavouring to diss the French back, saying: "It's hard to get worked up as Rouzaud is French and everyone is beneath the French".

If everyone is beneath the French, the French must be on top. I wonder if that is what he really meant?

Monday, July 10, 2006

Incorrect Tune

The music for the popular piece of classical music generally known as "Ave Maria" was in fact originally written as abstract music by J.S. Bach as part of Das wohltempierte Klavier. Gounod later transformed it into a religious song and there have been other versions of it since.

Clearly, however, it is good music with or without words and it has no original religious connotations. But it was a purely instrumental form of the music that was banned at Henry M. Jackson High School in Washington State -- apparently because it was too religious. The school thus added musical ignorance to its frantic hatred of Christianity. Details here

Politicians must not Say what their Voters Think

A British Conservative politician is in hot water because he said that Muslims in Britain should integrate into British society -- a wish that he often hears from his voters. Details here. His party leader, by contrast, cannot do enough to appease Muslim demands. See here and here.

No nonsense in Australia, though. Several leading members of the Australian Federal government and even some Leftist State government leaders have told the Muslims to shut up or ship out. See e.g. here

British T-shirt Update

That a British t-shirt seller was fined 80 pounds by the British police for selling t-shirts that dissed Tony Blair was mentioned here on the 5th..

The effect of the fine may not have been what was intended, however. The t-shirt seller reports:

"Getting fined worked," he says. "I had only sold two before the police came. Once word got round, people took pity on me and everyone wanted one. I ended up selling 375."

Sunday, July 09, 2006

Wow! A Doctor Can Now Speak Frankly to his Patients

It seems a pity that the First Amendment had to be invoked to allow that, though. New Hampshire's Board of Medicine wanted to stop it.

Rochester doctor Terry Bennett was very frank about how unattractive a greatly obese woman patient was. She found such truth-telling offensive and the medical board agreed. It initiated proceedings against Dr Bennett.

Merrimack County Superior Court put the medical board back in their box, however, and told them that their "proceedings" were a kangaroo court. Dr. Bennett now seems set to sue the Medical Board for the pain and suffering it caused him.

Bush=Hitler is such a common equation from the Left that it evokes just a yawn. But say that a Democrat equals Hitler and there is great outrage. Michigan Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm was targeted in an advertisement appearing in the Detroit-based Michigan Chronicle newspaper that featured photographs of Hitler and Granholm and accused Democrats of taking African-American voters for granted.

Granholm's Republican opponent had the good manners and good sense to join in the condemnation of the ad. How often do we hear Democrats condemning the Bush=Hitler theme?

As a libertarian, I am extremely suspicious of official attempts to ban any kind of speech but I CAN see the point of banning incitement to violence so I cannot really object to the British ban on certain anti-homosexual songs emanating from Jamaican singers -- though I do think that the torrent of pro-homosexual propaganda we get these days deserves similarly vigorous counterbalancing.

What amused me, however was the language in the songs concerned. I thought the language in this one was particularly graphic:

Also interesting is that homsexuality-protection obviously trumps something that would normally be sacrosanct: Minority culture. If minority culture is bad in one respect, maybe it could be bad in others?

Saturday, July 08, 2006

If a Republican had said this, there would be shrieks of "racism" from the media:

"You cannot go to a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I'm not joking"

But since it was Democrat Senator Joe Biden who said it, that's OK of course -- so much so that it has been virtually unmentioned in the mainstream media -- Yet another media coverup for Democrats.

No Free Speech in Sweden

The Supreme Court in Stockholm has just convicted four homosexuality critics of "hate speech" for handing out leaflets claiming that the promiscuous lifestyles of homosexuals were one of the main reasons for the spread of HIV and AIDS. Once again, truth was no defense apparently. The Supreme Court's decision cannot be appealed.

"According to the Chancellor of Justice of Sweden, Goran Lambertz, abusive remarks about Jews, calling suicide murderers of Jews heroes and whipping up war-like fervour against Jews in the Middle east does not constitute hate speech under Swedish Law.

That was California Democrat Rep. Filner speaking to two senior Veterans Affairs employees. The language was quickly deleted from all news reports of the incident but wicked old Cybercast News did not co-operate with that nice little bit of Democrat-friendly censorship.

But when President Bush mangles his words, it's front-page news, of course.

Friday, July 07, 2006

4th of July at the LA Times

They say that the Founding Fathers were "A bunch of racist, slave-owning white Men"

Sounds like hate speech to me. Even if it is all true, since when was truth a defence in hate-speech cases? I am not holding my breath while I wait for the L.A. Slimes to be prosecuted for their hate-speech, though

When some Italian American teenagers in New York beat up some black kids who entered their "turf", the black kids suffered bumps and bruises. That was an "atrocity" according to this report. I wonder why I have never heard it being described as an "atrocity" when blacks rape and murder whites?

Thursday, July 06, 2006

"The U.S. Supreme Court Monday put on hold an order to remove a monumental cross that sits on public land, giving hope to supporters just weeks before the cross was to be taken down....

In May, U.S. District Court Judge Gordon Thompson, Jr., declared the cross, a symbol of Christianity, was an unconstitutional endorsement of one religion over another. Thompson ordered the city to take down the cross

Wednesday, July 05, 2006

Many readers may have heard of this flap by now but, for those who have not, what do you think of the two quotes below?

"Strength lies not in defense, but in attack."

and

"The great masses of people ... will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one."

They are both thought-provoking points of view are they not? The first would seem to be a good slogan for (say) a football team and the second could be very easily seen as a good summary of (say) the way many people believed John Kerry's claims about the brutality of American troops in Vietnam.

So does it matter that both quotes are from Adolf Hitler? Even a stopped clock is right twice a day, is it not?

If you have ever studied logic, who first said those quotes doesn't matter at all. One of the things you learn about in logic are fallacies. And one of the classical informal fallacies is the ad hominem fallacy. That is the fallacy of deciding whether or not a statement is true on the basis of the person who uttered it. Truth is judged by evidence for or against a proposition, not by who says it.

But in a New York School, they seem to be a bit weak on logic (no surprise there!). Two kids chose those two slogans to be displayed underneath their photo in the school yearbook. And you can guess the hysteria.

Must not Criticize the Great Leader

Shades of Stalin: Tony Blair must not be insulted.

"Police issued two stallholders at a farming show with 80 pound fines for displaying T-shirts bearing the slogan "Bollocks to Blair"....

Tuesday, July 04, 2006

"An Establishment of Religion"

A July 4th reflection

I doubt that there is any document that has been more argued over than the U.S. Constitution. So I hesitate to say anything more about it. But the prohibition therein of "An Establishment of Religion" has in my view been so wilfully misinterpreted by SCOTUS that I feel I have to say something.

And what I want to do is simply to put the provision into the context of the time in which it was written. Below is a very brief excerpt that does that. It was written about a time just before the Declaration of Independence:

"While Virginia debated whether Anglicanism should be recognized as the only established state religion (Witherspoon was vociferously against it), Presbyterians and Congregationalists argued for religious freedom".

In other words, the provision was designed only to avoid the situation in England, where the government made one Christian denomination the only "correct" one. To say that the provision demands a separation of church and State is stretching it beyond all recognition.

No "Dumb Polacks"!

I personally tend to think highly of Poles. I even attended a Polish church recently. And all the Poles I know are pretty smart. But that does not mean that there are NO "dumb Polacks". There are dummies in any nationality. But apparently the New York branch of the Polish American Congress thinks that NOBODY with a Polish name may be portrayed as dumb -- as Lefty cartoonist Garry Trudeau found out recently. Details here.

No Nigerian Crookedness may be Mentioned (Except by Nigerians)

CNN recently aired a documentary called "How To Rob A Bank" which mentioned a Nigerian immigrant to the United States who had been convicted of identity theft and bank robbery. One of the people interviewed for the doco said that there are many Nigerians involved in shady dealings. Anybody who has received one of the vast number of "Nigerian scam" emails that arrive in our mailboxes almost every day would understand that comment.

But, according to various Nigerian organizations, you are not allowed to mention that. To portray SOME Nigerians as crooked is racist. Apparently, NO Nigerian may be portrayed as crooked. CNN has of course now apologized etc.

But the funniest of the objections comes from Nigeria itself. We read on a news site from Nigeria a condemnation of the CNN doco which is immediately followed by a sweeping condemnation of the crookedness and corruption in Nigerian politics! It says in effect that the corrupt activities of a few individual Nigerians are small potatoes compared to the corruption of the Nigerian government! Am I allowed to laugh?

"Tolerant" Canada barred a Muslim preacher from visiting there? Amazing though it may seem, they did. But why? You'll never guess. Was it because he preached hate against Jews, the USA or Christianity? It seems not. The one reason given in this CBC article was that he despised homosexuals! The only quote from the banned guy that the CBC gave was a mention that he would say "Please forgive me for polluting the mosque", before he uttered the word "homosexual".

It fits: "Homophobia" would be the ultimate sin for the CBC. Nothing else mattered compared to that massive sin.

Sunday, July 02, 2006

At Last the English Hit Back

Like Americans, the English are used to being blamed for everything under the sun and being called all sorts of names as part of that. They try to explain themselves from time to time but rarely hit back at those who attack them. That now seems to have changed a bit, however -- but only among English people living in Scotland, unfortunately.

"English residents in Scotland are fuming at a shop selling T-shirts with the message "Grow Your Own Dope - Plant an Englishman". They have made official complaints alleging racism and are threatening to involve the police."

If it had been a picture of Mohammed, the school would no doubt have been praised for its "diversity" or "tolerance" or some such. No tolerance for the slightest hint of Christianity, though.

Frank Ellis Bows Out

One of the most hotly debated free speech issues in Britain this year has been the Frank Ellis affair. Ellis is a senior academic at an English university who recently declared publicly his acceptance of the common scientific finding that, on average, blacks have lower IQs than whites.

His university suspended him from teaching as a result -- which violated academic freedom as well as free speech generally.

But some settlement of the matter has now been reached. Richard Lynn advises by email that: "The university of Leeds has allowed Frank Ellis to take early retirement with a modest but adequate pension. He asks me to thank you all for support in the press that likely contributed to encouraging the university to settle."

Saturday, July 01, 2006

Descriptive Dictionary in Trouble

Ever since the Oxford English Dictionary was compiled around 100 years ago, most dictionaries worldwide have been descriptive. They RECORD what people mean by words, they do not stipulate what is "proper" usage.

My Macquarie Australian Dictionary, for instance, defines "poofter" as a "male homosexual" because that is what the word is used to mean in Australia. Most Australian homosexuals would however regard the word as offensive and it is indeed often used as a term of contempt in Australia.

In Spain, however, the descriptive approach is getting attacked. The latest official dictionary of Spanish includes a number of words that are sometimes used with an offensive meaning and it records what those offensive meanings are. All sorts of minorities are up in arms over that. Details here

The Unmentionable Antisemitism

We read:

"A Dutch professor accused the president of his university of suppressing free speech by cutting out parts of a talk on Muslim anti-Semitism...

Van der Horst was allowed to deliver the first half of the speech, which focused on Christian anti-Semitism."

Is the American national anthem politically incorrect? From the 4th verse:Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: "In God is our trust."

Mohammad

"HATE SPEECH" is free speech: The U.S. Supreme Court stated the general rule regarding protected speech in Texas v. Johnson (109 S.Ct. at 2544), when it held: "The government may not prohibit the verbal or nonverbal expression of an idea merely because society finds the idea offensive or disagreeable." Federal courts have consistently followed this. Said Virginia federal district judge Claude Hilton: "The First Amendment does not recognize exceptions for bigotry, racism, and religious intolerance or ideas or matters some may deem trivial, vulgar or profane."

Even some advocacy of violence is protected by the 1st Amendment. In Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), the U.S. Supreme Court held unanimously that speech advocating violent illegal actions to bring about social change is protected by the First Amendment "except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action."

The double standard: Atheists can put up signs and billboards saying that Christianity is wrong and that is hunky dory. But if a Christian says that homosexuality is wrong, that is attacked as "hate speech"

One for the militant atheists to consider: "...it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg" -- Thomas Jefferson

"I think no subject should be off-limits, and I regard the laws in many Continental countries criminalizing Holocaust denial as philosophically repugnant and practically useless – in that they confirm to Jew-haters that the Jews control everything (otherwise why aren’t we allowed to talk about it?)" -- Mark Steyn

Voltaire's most famous saying was actually a summary of Voltaire's thinking by one of his biographers rather than something Voltaire said himself. Nonetheless it is a wholly admirable sentiment: "I disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it". I am of a similar mind.

The traditional advice about derogatory speech: "Sticks and stones will break your bones but names will never hurt you". Apparently people today are not as emotionally robust as their ancestors were.

The KKK were members of the DEMOCRATIC party. Google "Klanbake" if you doubt it

A phobia is an irrational fear, so the terms "Islamophobic" and "homophobic" embody a claim that the people so described are mentally ill. There is no evidence for either claim. Both terms are simply abuse masquerading as diagnoses and suggest that the person using them is engaged in propaganda rather than in any form of rational or objective discourse.

Leftists often pretend that any mention of race is "racist" -- unless they mention it, of course. But leaving such irrational propaganda aside, which statements really are racist? Can statements of fact about race be "racist"? Such statements are simply either true or false. The most sweeping possible definition of racism is that a racist statement is a statement that includes a negative value judgment of some race. Absent that, a statement is not racist, for all that Leftists might howl that it is. Facts cannot be racist so nor is the simple statement of them racist. Here is a statement that cannot therefore be racist by itself, though it could be false: "Blacks are on average much less intelligent than whites". If it is false and someone utters it, he could simply be mistaken or misinformed.

Categorization is a basic human survival skill so racism as the Left define it (i.e. any awareness of race) is in fact neither right nor wrong. It is simply human

Whatever your definition of racism, however, a statement that simply mentions race is not thereby racist -- though one would think otherwise from American Presidential election campaigns. Is a statement that mentions dogs, "doggist" or a statement that mentions cats, "cattist"?

If any mention of racial differences is racist then all Leftists are racist too -- as "affirmative action" is an explicit reference to racial differences

Was Abraham Lincoln a racist? "You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think your race suffer very greatly, many of them by living among us, while ours suffer from your presence. In a word, we suffer on each side. If this be admitted, it affords a reason at least why we should be separated. It is better for both, therefore, to be separated." -- Spoken at the White House to a group of black community leaders, August 14th, 1862

Gimlet-eyed Leftist haters sometimes pounce on the word "white" as racist. Will the time come when we have to refer to the White House as the "Full spectrum of light" House?

The spirit of liberty is "the spirit which is not too sure that it is right." and "Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it. While it lies there it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it." -- Judge Learned Hand

Mostly, a gaffe is just truth slipping out

Two lines below of a famous hymn that would be incomprehensible to Leftists today ("honor"? "right"? "freedom?" Freedom to agree with them is the only freedom they believe in)

First to fight for right and freedom,
And to keep our honor clean

It is of course the hymn of the USMC -- still today the relentless warriors that they always were.

It seems a pity that the wisdom of the ancient Greek philosopher Epictetus is now little known. Remember, wrote the Stoic thinker, "that foul words or blows in themselves are no outrage, but your judgment that they are so. So when any one makes you angry, know that it is your own thought that has angered you. Wherefore make it your endeavour not to let your impressions carry you away."

"Since therefore the knowledge and survey of vice is in this world so necessary to the constituting of human virtue, and the scanning of error to the confirmation of truth, how can we more safely, and with less danger, scout into the regions of sin and falsity than by reading all manner of tractates, and hearing all manner of reason?" -- English poet John Milton (1608-1674) in Areopagitica

Leftists can try to get you fired from your job over something that you said and that's not an attack on free speech. But if you just criticize something that they say, then that IS an attack on free speech

The intellectual Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius (AD 121-180) could have been speaking of much that goes on today when he said: "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."

I despair of the ADL. Jews have enough problems already and yet in the ADL one has a prominent Jewish organization that does its best to make itself offensive to Christians. Their Leftism is more important to them than the welfare of Jewry -- which is the exact opposite of what they ostensibly stand for! Jewish cleverness seems to vanish when politics are involved. Fortunately, Christians are true to their saviour and have loving hearts. Jewish dissatisfaction with the myopia of the ADL is outlined here. Note that Foxy was too grand to reply to it.

NOTE: The archives provided by blogspot below are rather inconvenient. They break each month up into small bits. If you want to scan whole months at a time, the backup archives will suit better. See here or here